Skip to main content

Titanium vs cobalt chromium: what is the best rod material to enhance adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correction with sublaminar bands?

Abstract

Purpose

Cobalt chromium (CoCr) rods have recently gained popularity in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) surgical treatment, replacing titanium (Ti) rods, with promising frontal correction rates in all-screw constructs. Posteromedial translation has been shown to emphasize thoracic sagittal correction, but the influence of rod material in this correction technique has never been investigated. The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative correction between Ti and CoCr rods for the treatment of thoracic AIS using posteromedial translation technique.

Methods

70 patients operated for thoracic (Lenke 1 or 2) AIS, in 2 institutions, between 2010 and 2013, were included. All patients underwent posterior fusion with hybrid constructs using posteromedial translation technique. The only difference between groups in the surgical procedure was the rod material (Ti or CoCr rods). Radiological measurements were compared preoperatively, postoperatively and at last follow-up (minimum 2 years).

Results

Preoperatively, groups were similar in terms of coronal and sagittal parameters. Postoperatively, no significant difference was observed between Ti and CoCr regarding frontal corrections, even when the preoperative flexibility of the curves was taken into account (p = 0.13). CoCr rods allowed greater restoration of T4T12 thoracic kyphosis, which remained stable over time (p = 0.01). Most common postoperative complication was proximal junctional kyphosis (n = 4). However, no significant difference was found between groups regarding postoperative complications rate.

Conclusion

CoCr and Ti rods both provide significant and stable frontal correction in AIS treated with posteromedial translation technique using hybrid constructs. However, CoCr might be considered to emphasize sagittal correction in hypokyphotic patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Glotzbecker MP, Riedel MD, Vitale MG, Matsumoto H, Roye DP, Erickson M et al (2013) What’s the evidence? Systematic literature review of risk factors and preventive strategies for surgical site infection following pediatric spine surgery. J Pediatr Orthop 33(5):479–487

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Serhan H, Mhatre D, Newton P, Giorgio P, Sturm P (2013) Would CoCr rods provide better correctional forces than stainless steel or titanium for rigid scoliosis curves? J Spinal Disord Tech 26(2):E70–E74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lamerain M, Bachy M, Delpont M, Kabbaj R, Mary P, Vialle R (2014) CoCr rods provide better frontal correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated by all-pedicle screw fixation. Eur Spine J 23(6):1190–1196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ilharreborde B, Even J, Lefevre Y, Fitoussi F, Presedo A, Penneçot G-F et al (2010) Hybrid constructs for tridimensional correction of the thoracic spine in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparative analysis of universal clamps versus hooks. Spine 35(3):306–314

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mazda K, Ilharreborde B, Even J, Lefevre Y, Fitoussi F, Penneçot G-F (2009) Efficacy and safety of posteromedial translation for correction of thoracic curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using a new connection to the spine: the Universal Clamp. Eur Spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 18(2):158–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sales de Gauzy J, Jouve J-L, Ilharreborde B, Blondel B, Accadbled F, Mazda K (2014) Use of the Universal Clamp in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 23(Suppl 4):S446–S451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lenke LG (2005) Lenke classification system of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: treatment recommendations. Instr Course Lect 54:537–542

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ilharreborde B, Morel E, Fitoussi F, Presedo A, Souchet P, Penneçot G-F et al (2008) Planification du niveau supérieur d’arthrodèse dans les scolioses idiopathiques thoraciques de l’adolescent: étude prospective de 103 cas. Rev Chir Orthopédique Réparatrice Appar Mot 94(5):481–489

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Faro FD, Marks MC, Pawelek J, Newton PO (2004) Evaluation of a functional position for lateral radiograph acquisition in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 29(20):2284–2289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ilharreborde B, Steffen JS, Nectoux E, Vital JM, Mazda K, Skalli W et al (2011) Angle measurement reproducibility using EOS three-dimensional reconstructions in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated by posterior instrumentation. Spine 36(20):E1306–E1313

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Vora V, Crawford A, Babekhir N, Boachie-Adjei O, Lenke L, Peskin M et al (2007) A pedicle screw construct gives an enhanced posterior correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis when compared with other constructs: myth or reality. Spine 32(17):1869–1874

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lamerain M, Bachy M, Dubory A, Kabbaj R, Scemama C, Vialle R (2016) All-pedicle screw fixation with 6-mm-diameter cobalt-chromium rods provides optimized sagittal correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Clin Spine Surg. doi:10.1097/BSD.0000000000000413

  13. Yagi M, Rahm M, Gaines R, Maziad A, Ross T, Kim HJ et al (2014) Characterization and surgical outcomes of proximal junctional failure in surgically treated patients with adult spinal deformity. Spine 39(10):E607–E614

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hwang SW, Samdani AF, Marks M, Bastrom T, Garg H, Lonner B et al (2013) Five-year clinical and radiographic outcomes using pedicle screw only constructs in the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 22(6):1292–1299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kim YJ, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Kim J, Cho SK, Cheh G et al (2007) Proximal junctional kyphosis in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis after 3 different types of posterior segmental spinal instrumentation and fusions: incidence and risk factor analysis of 410 cases. Spine 32(24):2731–2738

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ilharreborde B, Sebag G, Skalli W, Mazda K (2013) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated with posteromedial translation: radiologic evaluation with a 3D low-dose system. Eur Spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 22(11):2382–2391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bridwell KH, Hanson DS, Rhee JM, Lenke LG, Baldus C, Blanke K (2002) Correction of thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with segmental hooks, rods, and Wisconsin wires posteriorly: it’s bad and obsolete, correct? Spine 27(18):2059–2066

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Delorme S, Labelle H, Aubin CE, de Guise JA, Rivard CH, Poitras B et al (2000) A three-dimensional radiographic comparison of Cotrel-Dubousset and Colorado instrumentations for the correction of idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 25(2):205–210

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Cheng I, Kim Y, Gupta MC, Bridwell KH, Hurford RK, Lee SS et al (2005) Apical sublaminar wires versus pedicle screws—which provides better results for surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Spine 30(18):2104–2112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Polirsztok E, Gavaret M, Gsell T, Suprano I, Choufani E, Bollini G, Jouve JL (2015) Sublaminar bands: are they safe? Eur Spine J 24(7):1441–1449

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Strickland BA, Sayama C, Briceño V, Lam SK, Luerssen TG, Jea A (2015) Use of subtransverse process polyester bands in pediatric spine surgery: a case series of 4 patients with a minimum of 12 months’ follow-up. J Neurosurg Pediatr. doi:10.3171/2015.6.PEDS15255

  22. Desai SK, Sayama C, Vener D, Brayton A, Briceño V, Luerssen TG, Jea A (2015) The feasibility and safety of using sublaminar polyester bands in hybrid spinal constructs in children and transitional adults for neuromuscular scoliosis. J Neurosurg Pediatr 15(3):328–337. doi:10.3171/2014.9.PEDS1468 (Epub 2015 Jan 2)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ahmad FU, Sidani C, Fourzali R, Wang MY (2013) Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging artifact with cobalt-chromium versus titanium spinal instrumentation: presented at the 2013 joint spine section meeting. Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 19(5):629–636

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Remes V, Helenius I, Schlenzka D, Yrjönen T, Ylikoski M, Poussa M (2004) Cotrel-Dubousset (CD) or Universal Spine System (USS) instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS): comparison of midterm clinical, functional, and radiologic outcomes. Spine 29(18):2024–2030

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Audrey Angelliaume.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Angelliaume, A., Ferrero, E., Mazda, K. et al. Titanium vs cobalt chromium: what is the best rod material to enhance adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correction with sublaminar bands?. Eur Spine J 26, 1732–1738 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4838-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4838-0

Keywords

  • Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis
  • Sublaminar bands
  • Cobalt–chromium rods
  • Hypokyphosis
  • Posteromedial translation